Others have gone down this dubious path before, but these authors’ embrace of the plaintiffs’ expert witnesses’ opinion in Bendectin litigation reveals the insubstantiality and the invalidity of their method.[18] As Professor Ronald Allen put the matter: “Given the weight of evidence in favor of Bendectin’s safety, it seems peculiar to argue for mosaic evidence [WOE] from a case in which it would have plainly been misleading. [read post]